Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a ton of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out the boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.

Most matches are completely one-sided beatdowns.

The ratings are not level based you are matched based on your Elo (Skill) rating. If there is a level 5 in the match its because they somehow managed to reach/show the same skill as the 25/30's in the matches. Instead of blaming the matchmaking system blame the Elo rating system that assigns scores because the matchmaking is doing its job and pairing people together with about the same skill and attempting to make it 50/50 odds on either side.

I doubt that a level 5 player and a level 25 player have the same level of skill, simply because the level 25 would have more experience with the game. Even if the level 5 was good at DotA and has a great ELO score, he still does not have the level of experience with the game that the level 25 has.

So ELO shouldn't be pairing level 5's and level 25's together in ANY match. ELO is based off of win-loss ratio, right? That doesn't seem to be an accurate measure of skill, since new players are being paired up with veteran players. That's just asking for a feeding situation, and nobody wants that.

If you're under level 10 you're going to die to anyone over level 19 just by looking at their runes and masteries, not taking play experience into question at all. It's completely disgusting that MM would ever put a level 5 in a game with anyone 20+. That's just plain rude (and wrong).

Honestly, longer queue times would fix 90% of the problems, IMHO. The vast majority of my games pop in less than 5 seconds. I am perfectly content with waiting a minute.

On the high ELO bracket, it seems that most of the games are close matches. Usually it takes one side to do a successful gank or clever moves to break the non-agressive nature.

There's a generally high level of skill in the games I play in though, as I see the same names over and over and over again on solo que.

However, my biggest complaint still has to be when a newb plays arranged with a higher elo. The newb will get thrashed 90% of the time.

----

The game does not care about level of the player.
It cares about how well the player does. Closer to a win spread, as opposed to win/loss ratio.

Like, If you have -20 wins compared to losses, you're in a low elo bracket and might face newer players mroe often.
If you have +20, a higher elo bracket and will face much more experienced players.

Things like that. It's still funny to see newer players use a hero like annie and still destroy level 30 guys because a lot of what happens is based off of your skill level. Runes/masteries just enhance it.

As it turns out, math PhD's are pretty smart people, and without a doubt will make a better rating system than you ever could. That's why Riot is paying them and not you.

Last time I checked, PhD's cannot calculate Fun.

The system may find that the teams are balanced, but this does not in turn mean the matches will be fun. Fun games do involved balanced ELO fighting in Theory. The Theory fails because it ranks an individual person based on the results of a TEAM. The system needs to look at the individual player based on KDA for their ELO. I have seen games win with a player on the winning team who was at 2/9/2, and he gains ELO he should not get. This should be considered in the calculation for a balanced result. If the winning player did not have a 1:1 ratio then he should not get 1:1 ELO, he should gain reduced ELO depending on his ratio. This results in him being more accurately paired the next game. The player example in question would gain only 20% ELO instead of the full percentage.

Similarly, losing players who manage a 21/3/8 should gain 7 times more ELO than the average for his team loss. To make this completely accurate, this should only affect Solo queu results. Premade results SHOULD be based off team ELO, since they are working as a complete team (assuming they are using vent and pre-coordinating).

The system may find that the teams are balanced, but this does not in turn mean the matches will be fun. Fun games do involved balanced ELO fighting in Theory. The Theory fails because it ranks an individual person based on the results of a TEAM. The system needs to look at the individual player based on KDA for their ELO. I have seen games win with a player on the winning team who was at 2/9/2, and he gains ELO he should not get. This should be considered in the calculation for a balanced result. If the winning player did not have a 1:1 ratio then he should not get 1:1 ELO, he should gain reduced ELO depending on his ratio. This results in him being more accurately paired the next game. The player example in question would gain only 20% ELO instead of the full percentage.

Similarly, losing players who manage a 21/3/8 should gain 7 times more ELO than the average for his team loss. To make this completely accurate, this should only affect Solo queu results. Premade results SHOULD be based off team ELO, since they are working as a complete team (assuming they are using vent and pre-coordinating).

Everything in this, I agree with. Seriously, I refuse to call this game anything other than "beta" until the match making system is fixed or changed. Ever since I hit past level 16 almost every single one of my matches have either been really easy steamrolls or absolute massacres for the other team. A feeder should get lower ELO, if I'm 20/2 and he's 2/20 we should really not get the same amount of experience.

I was the lone 30 on the 2nd team. We didn't have a chance. By the time I reached level 8 (mid), we had lost 3 towers between the outer lanes, and had a 12:1 ratio.

Main fixes to the matchmaker that HAVE to happen:

Seperate all players by level range (increments of 5). ONLY match players in their own bracket. If any given bracket has players queued AND the shortest queue is over 1 minute, THEN the matchmaker considers bringing in 2 players of a lower or higher (same for both) level bracket and assigning one per team. After 2 minutes, the matchmaker can make a match for them using players 2 brackets higher/lower (and it will never exceed this). Only players in other brackets that have been in queue for over a minute can be selected.

Weight ELO results based on 3 factors. First, +/- 10% for short games/long games (under 30 minutes is +10% gain for winners, +10% loss for losers - and over 50 minutes is -10% gain/loss). Second, weight ELO adjustment by participation. Sort the players on each team seperately. 1 kill is worth 1.25 points. 1 death is worth -1 point. 1 assist is worth .5 points. Top player gets +20% ELO gain for a win, or -20% loss for losing. 2nd place is +/- 10%. 3rd is standard. 4th gets -10% ELO gained for winning, +10% ELO lost for losing. Last gets -/+ 20%. This results in the same NET ELO change for a premade, but for pugs it keeps bad players from riding the coattails of good matchups (ie, the 27/2/13 Annie that dominates the match winning it for them).

Improve the xp/ip gain for practice games, or otherwise make them a more viable option for people to pair up in. Currently too many people "practice" a champion in the real (ELO) games and ruin it for everyone they are paired with, simply because they get more xp/ip for a real loss than a practice win, and NEVER pull their ELO value.

Up to level 25, I had a fair amount of completely one sided match (about 50%).
Recently the teams tend to be fairly equal to the point where most of the games last 45+ minutes with 10% of the games being over 60 minutes !

To be honest, often times, I queue with friends, and often we play very defensively, and it generally ends up with the other team downing 3-4 of our towers before we get one, and it's just the style that we play. We're very good at turning it around.

In my opinion, you just need to communicate with who you're playing with more.

Generally if you start a sentence with "If you guys want to win", that normally gets peoples attention.